| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
al3
Pure-blooded Human
Joined: Oct 28, 2007
Posts: 34
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:16 pm Post subject: Does OO for Mac mean end of Neo? |
|
A few simple questions to satisfy my curiosity:
1. Besides the fact that OO is 3.x and Neo is 2.x, are there major technical differences between the two? Did OO use the native Mac tools that Neo has had for a long time (as opposed to X11)?
2. Will Neo continue to be developed? Is there an intrinsic need for Neo now that there is a Mac version off OO?
Perhaps the above have been addressed somewhere on the Neo site?
Thanks,
Al |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Samwise
Captain Naiobi
Joined: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 2315
Location: Montpellier, France
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
al3
Pure-blooded Human
Joined: Oct 28, 2007
Posts: 34
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
Thank you for providing the link. I had no idea Neo was such a huge effort and was actually more-advanced than OO. I used OO in Linux for about 5 years until 2 years ago when I junked it and went to the "better Linux" which is what I call OS X (and never really looked back.)
I've used Neo every day since then and never ever had a problem. I once sent a donation but not a large one. I will send another (but with business off as it is, it also won't be large.)
I thought Neo was just OO code that had been tweaked to use Aqua instead of X11. I didn't know it was such a huge undertaking until I read the link you supplied.
I do have this question. Did the Neo people give their "Mac code" to the OO people? In other words does OO and Neo use the same methodology in the new non- X11 OO 3.x?
I have no plans to change. Without Neo I would never have moved to the Mac as I had tons of .swx and .odt files. Neo made the Mac possible for me and I'll be "loyal" to Neo as long as it is viable... which looks to be a long time.
Thanks.
A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
| al3 wrote: | | I do have this question. Did the Neo people give their "Mac code" to the OO people? In other words does OO and Neo use the same methodology in the new non- X11 OO 3.x? |
No, OpenOffice.org does not use NeoOffice's native Mac code. Sun Microsystems' OpenOffice.org engineers implemented their native Mac code from scratch. So, in NeoOffice 3.0, we remove their Mac code and replace it with ours.
We have no plans to use OpenOffice.org's Mac code for two reasons:
1. Our code is more stable - Our code has been in use by several hundred thousand users on a daily basis for a few years now and during that time, hundreds of uncommon bugs have been found and fixed. In constrast, OpenOffice.org's code is brand new and only lightly used so they will have lots of bug fixing work to go through. It makes no sense for our users to go through that pain again.
2. Our code is as fast and in some cases significantly faster - While we were fixing bugs over the last few years, we also spend considerable effort eliminating speed bottlenecks in the code. In contast, OpenOffice.org's native Mac code is not optimized particularly in the areas of text layout and slideshow presentations as you can see in our performance comparison in the following NeoWiki article:
http://neowiki.neooffice.org/index.php/NeoOffice_Performance_Comparison
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat
Pure-blooded Human
Joined: Oct 15, 2005
Posts: 35
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
I've just made some benchmarks on my iMac and it *considerably* faster than on the benchmark site.
(launch time is much closer to 15s than the 26 on your list, and 4-5s for warm start)
maybe you want to re-test on a faster system? (to get better figures... 26s to launch the app sounds pretty bad.)
btw: OOo3 took ~8sec for a cold start (including the time i needed to manually click on "Text document" after it launched to get the writer)
(Edit: my machine is a iMac 2.4GHz, 3GB Ram, 750GB disc, OS X 10.5.5) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
| mat wrote: | I've just made some benchmarks on my iMac and it *considerably* faster than on the benchmark site.
(launch time is much closer to 15s than the 26 on your list, and 4-5s for warm start) |
Unfortunately, that is the fastest machines we have. If you can list out your times for all, we could add them to the NeoWiki page.
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat
Pure-blooded Human
Joined: Oct 15, 2005
Posts: 35
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
| pluby wrote: | | mat wrote: | I've just made some benchmarks on my iMac and it *considerably* faster than on the benchmark site.
(launch time is much closer to 15s than the 26 on your list, and 4-5s for warm start) |
Unfortunately, that is the fastest machines we have. If you can list out your times for all, we could add them to the NeoWiki page.
Patrick |
I dont have time right now, but maybe next weekend. (no promises)
How did you benchmark it? any script, or just manually? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pluby
The Architect
Joined: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 11949
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
| mat wrote: | | How did you benchmark it? any script, or just manually? |
Manually using a stopwatch. Note that some steps require interaction while timing. For example, while running a slideshow, you repeatedly press the spacebar to ensure that the slideshow will move at its maximum speed and you need to click on OOo's Start Center as fast as possible.
Patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
